You might also be interested in
Replies (7)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Job Seeker's Allowance?
Have they done anything about this being coded out yet? I can't think of any valid reason why Job Seeker's Allowance should appear on a coding notice.
JSA in coding notices
This is for 2010/11 tax codes. We have some clients who claimed benefits in 2008/09 before getting their current job. HMRC then codes out the same amount of benefit in the current year with the comment "you have told us there might be some gaps in your employment".
If someone had claimed Job Seeker's Allowance earlier this year, they would either have a P45 from the Benefits Agency which shows the benefit as part of their earnings to date, which goes as "income from previous employments" in their new employer's payroll, or they go on a Month 1 code, which ensures they don't get the benefit of their allowances for the period when they were unemployed. HMRC would then send them a coding notice with the benefit included in the pay and tax from previous employments, and it would get taxed that way. There is no need, as far as I can see, to adjust the tax code itself.
HMRC approach to PAYE code issue
I would be interested in other practitioners experiences in dealing with the PAYE notice issues for 2010/11. Our experience ranges from very helpful to downright obstructive. In the same office we have dealt with a jobsworth whose reaction to being told that our client had only one source of employment for over four years, was to say that nothing could be done to move the personal allowance from the prior employment to the current one, until a P45 had been received, and would not state the previous employer details to us although we are the registered agent, and a colleague who when we phoned later with the previous employer's name was quite happy to amend the record!
What guidance has been issued within HMRC to deal with the "apparent" multiple employment issue? This seems to arise where P45's for whatever reason have not been processed on the employer record, but it is hardly the former employees job to put it right!
Surely the common sense approach (oh dear, I'm hallucinating again) is for any allowances to be given against the "employment of choice" of the taxpayer, with the other employment(s) being coded BR or D0 until the employer issues can be sorted out?
5 more items on the list of known NPS issues
The latest list of known NPS issues, updated sometime in the last few days, has 5 new items on it.
They are:
Works number truncation;
Employment and support allowance;
Gift Aid not included in 2010-11 tax code;
Married Allowance transferred to Wife (MAW) not included; and
Potential underpayments in code for Self Assessment cases.
The list is on http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/agents/nps.htm
Kind regards
Shirley
Nitices of coding
Both my husband and I are pensioners with small additional pensions as well as the state pension. We also still have a small practice which brings in additional income. We have both received ridiculous coding notices in the last two weeks. Mine arrived this morning informing me that I would be earning over £112,950 and that the pension provider must use K305! My husband was also told his earnings would be over £112,850! We wish they were!
How can the IR keep churning out such rubbish. The line for reporting incorrect codes must be running hot, I tried to get through but gave it up as a bad jub. All operators are busy!!!!! What excuse will they have for all the upset they will causing a lot of people?